Re: The Hurd: what is it?

[Bas Wijnen]

On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 10:10:09AM +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> You should go into politics with the evading answers you are giving,
> they have no substance other than: Do as you please, I do not care.
> 
> Which is immensly useful for setting a direction...

As you very well know, the current situation is that Mach is considered
unsuitable for the Hurd in a releasable state, L4 used to be the alternative,
and we are still discussing if it will be used, and if not, what then.

That means the project is in a very clear state at the moment, which is
defining the design principles we want, or if we don't want to work from
principles, defining the design goals.  No useful code can be written for the
"new" Hurd at this moment.

As you yourself have stated in the past, we're a bunch of volunteers, nobody
tells us what to work on, we choose that ourselves.  That's why the new
microkernel needs broad support: Otherwise noone is going to actually build
the new system.

Both Thomas and Marcus have now said "work on what you think is important", or
as you say "do as you please".  None of them said "I do not care" though.
They seem to know very well that they cannot "set a direction".  They can only
guide us and we can choose to follow.  Since at this moment they don't know
where we're going, I think it's very wise of them not to point in a random
direction and shout "That way!", but wait until we have decided on a direction
together.

Thanks,
Bas

-- 
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
   in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word.
Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either.
For more information, see http://129.125.47.90/e-mail.html

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature